72 Replies - 3258 Views - Last Post: 16 April 2010 - 07:17 AM

See? This is why macs suck.

This has been debated to no end (all in good fun: we're programmers, no matter what I think we can all say we're pro-computer), but this has set me off and I bet it's going to set a lot of people off here too.

Why does Apple insist on shoveling shit in the face of absolutely everybody it comes in contact with? First the users are made to pay a premium for hardware that is the same as any acer (and indeed, you can swap out ram in a lot of the mac notebooks). Then they make you pay more for the 'only multi-touch phone' and threaten to sue everybody who tries to do multitouch as well into the ground. Then they kick apps out of their app store which, OK, there were a lot of bad ones, but it removes the possibility of creating an app as a learning project and actually making some money off of it, which I think should be encouraged.

And now this? First they say the hell with the users, then they say the hell with the competition, then it's the hell with their app developers and now finally it's the hell with us, the ones who can make their apps for them? I really want to hear what you guys have to say about this, I can't make sense of what they're doing.

Replies To: See? This is why macs suck.

Re: See? This is why macs suck.

Posted 13 April 2010 - 08:18 PM

Apple has something called a "patent" on the multi-touch technology. Go figure that they'd try to protect that. If it really pisses developers off, they will shift to another platform which also offers applications. Apple isn't the only smartphone company in the business so it's not like you don't have a choice.

Re: See? This is why macs suck.

Posted 13 April 2010 - 08:20 PM

I'm not going to make the argument that patents are bad, but I really do think that for something that is independently developed (as all code kind of has to be, on some level) should not be considered an infringement. If I make a machine that you put in your pocket and it lets you fly and I don't tell *anyone* how to make it, but someone comes up with the exact same machine- on their own, and which works on a different operating principle- the very next day, I don't think I should be able to sue them for infringement because the patent should be on the way that my machine works, not on machines that let you fly as a category.

Re: See? This is why macs suck.

No hold on! Apple have the right do what they want to their own operating system, and this isn't new news i did a post about it on my blog the day the IPhone 4.0 OS was released.

Apple might be limiting us developers, and you can say its not fair but Microsofts release .net 4.0 with Visual Studio meaning that the first product with .net 4.0 options is Microsofts product. I don't see you slagging them.

I might have a mac yes, but i still think that windows is a better environment for development and has a better base for looking for open source applications. But mac is better for not being able to catch virus's as easy and for not BSODing me ever 2 minutes.

So what if the hardware is the same as any other computers apple also support you in ways that are better. I'm sorry if your computer breaks you get shifted around from your OS manufacturer and hardware developer when apple are one medium which keeps it simple and don't pass the blame. Apples customer care is exceptional.

I agree how they sensor the app store is uncalled for and morally wrong. An example is that they wouldn't allow opera mini to be a browser so opera kicked there arse by loading the page on there server then showing the user it. But its their decision.

No because there Xcode development environment is good and you can use 3rd party tools as a matter of fact just not compile through another way. Which was mostly aimed at adobe due to them being dicks, as they didn't support mac properly - even with 8gbs of ram i load a YT video in full screen and it crashes for a second or two.

So adobe dissevered it as now flash Cs5 is not allowed to compile to the Iphone.

Re: See? This is why macs suck.

It's not morally wrong to censor apps. It's their god damned store. They get to say what is and isn't sold in it. If you don't like it, stop using it. You have options. Welcome to a the free market.

Quote

If I make a machine that you put in your pocket and it lets you fly and I don't tell *anyone* how to make it, but someone comes up with the exact same machine- on their own, and which works on a different operating principle- the very next day, I don't think I should be able to sue them for infringement because the patent should be on the way that my machine works, not on machines that let you fly as a category.

Unfortunately for you, that is essentially how US patent law works. You couldn't take legal action against anyone though until your patent was approved for your invention. You would also need some sort of evidence to prove that you did indeed come up with the invention before the other guy.

Re: See? This is why macs suck.

Re: See? This is why macs suck.

Posted 13 April 2010 - 08:33 PM

It's not even all that hard to get an app on the app store. This app I made a while back just cycled through random colors and I submitted it for fun and it was accepted and on the app store within 10 days. I was just amused at the situation. Then again, I wasn't trying to create something to intentionally be a replacement for a default iPhone app.

I've used every major operating system and I enjoy them all under certain circumstances.

Re: See? This is why macs suck.

It's not morally wrong to censor apps. It's their god damned store. They get to say what is and isn't sold in it. If you don't like it, stop using it. You have options. Welcome to a the free market.

Quote

If I make a machine that you put in your pocket and it lets you fly and I don't tell *anyone* how to make it, but someone comes up with the exact same machine- on their own, and which works on a different operating principle- the very next day, I don't think I should be able to sue them for infringement because the patent should be on the way that my machine works, not on machines that let you fly as a category.

Unfortunately for you, that is essentially how US patent law works. You couldn't take legal action against anyone though until your patent was approved for your invention. You would also need some sort of evidence to prove that you did indeed come up with the invention before the other guy.

I'm aware of this- I'm generally pretty up-to-date on patent laws and practices- and I still am in support of patents as a general rule. However, this is a major area that needs to be improved. To be honest, I really wish I could patent "using two fingers on your touch screen instead of one" so that I could charge royalties from apple and sue them for all their infringing profits, because this is what they've done with multi-touch.

edit for clarity:

I'm saying that patents should only reflect the operating principles, ie, you should be able to patent a car that flies using magnetism, but not cars that fly in general (using any method).

Re: See? This is why macs suck.

Posted 13 April 2010 - 08:59 PM

Patents are a good thing. Design patents- patents which cover the aesthetics of an invention or the way that an invention is interacted with (note: this is different from how an invention is used) are a bad thing. Invent the ball mouse and patent it, but don't sue the guy who invents the optical mouse. You use them the same way, but they work in different ways. you can't (or shouldn't be able to) sue the guy who invented the optical mouse even though it is, obviously a mouse, because the significant piece of it- the mouse ball- is completely absent, and in essence, that is your entire invention. without that, all you've done is stuck some buttons at the end of a cable- the entire invention revolves around every piece working in the same way and since buttons at the end of a cable are general and not something that is unique or remarkably different, it's your mouse ball that is the central part of your patent, and without that, without the central piece, there is no infringement, there is simply another solution to the same problem.